Help with tablet weight question

Question for people who are cutting using a scale:

I’m down to 2mgs of Valium and will start to taper soon from it.

Here’s my question.

Each pill is about .170 in weight. Some are .167 all the way to .175 or so

Say the average weight of 10 pills is .170, and then the first pill I pick up weighs .167, what do I do?

I know this gets easier once I get down to say .150 or so bc it will all cancel out, but how do I navigate this at the beginning when I taking small numbers off and the pill weight is so close to the dose weight I’ll be taking.

If a pill weighs .165, is that pill less than 2mgs bc

the average weight is .170?

Say the first 5 days I use 5 pills that weigh .170g.

It’s all going smooth.

I’m reducing .001g each day.

Then I get to .165 and I grab a pill and it weighs .165, do I just take that pill without cutting .05g off of it?

I hope I’m explaining my question clearly here and that you could help me. I appreciate it.

Check your PMs.

Why? You wouldn't be providing taper advice via the PM system in contravention of the rules, would you!?

Check your PMs.

 

Why? You wouldn't be providing taper advice via the PM system in contravention of the rules, would you!?

1)  Because he PM'd me before he posted the question on the board.

2)  If you want to review my response (which I'm sure you access to), you will see the only advice I gave him was 1)how to find an average weight, and 2) how to use that to make uniform measurement.  Pretty much junior high math stuff.  You will see I gave him absolutely NO advice on how to taper.

The amount of benzo in each pill is the same.  An original .165 mg pill has the same amount of benzo as a .170 mg pill.

 

 

Not true.  Even 2 tablets that weigh exactly the same may not have the same amount of active ingredient.

Actually, the US Pharmacopiea  /FDA standards allow  +/- 15%  (30% range) deviation for both weight and content.  Most mfgrs are able to hold tighter standard than that (+/- 5%), but the tablet-to-tablet dose and weight definitely vary.

Check your PMs.

 

Why? You wouldn't be providing taper advice via the PM system in contravention of the rules, would you!?

 

1)  Because he PM'd me before he posted the question on the board.

 

2)  If you want to review my response (which I'm sure you access to), you will see the only advice I gave him was 1)how to find an average weight, and 2) how to use that to make uniform measurement.  Pretty much junior high math stuff.  You will see I gave him absolutely NO advice on how to taper.

Well, given that you responded to a detailed taper question on the forum with, "Check your PMs", it naturally invites the question. I'll take you at your word that the nature of your PM was unrelated to providing withdrawal or taper advice.

By the way, although it is of course technically possible to query the database to search for PMs, I can assure you that we do not. The nearest we have come to this was in a case of serious abuse, where a member was misrepresenting her qualifications and PMing members inviting them to use her commercial Skype counselling services.

http://www.benzobuddies.org/forum/index.php?topic=167582.0

But even in that case, we did not actually read the PMs: we just queried the database for a list of members who had received her contact details; the query returned just the names of the members (not the actual messages). We then PM'd the members the members to let them know what had occurred.

We reply upon members reporting misuse of the PM system. As far as we can tell, they are usually pretty good about doing this. Though, in the case I referenced above, the list of members who had received such messages was multiple times the number of reports, which was disappointing.

Colin-

My exact PM'd response:

"Weigh 10 pills and get an average weight.  Then crush the 10 tablets into a powder.  Just weigh your doses from that powder onto the scale."

And when I respond on the board "check your PMs", it means I already answered that question and don't want to do it over again.  It does NOT mean I am trying to hide any advice from the board in general.

Colin-

 

My exact PM'd response:

 

"Weigh 10 pills and get an average weight.  Then crush the 10 tablets into a powder.  Just weigh your doses from that powder onto the scale."

 

 

And when I respond on the board "check your PMs", it means I already answered that question and don't want to do it over again.  It does NOT mean I am trying to hide any advice from the board in general.

So, you were providing taper advice via the PM system! I do not understand how you can interpret your PM message other than as taper advice. You will need to stop proving that kind of support via the PM system. If you make mistakes, state opinion as fact, etc., then there would be no opportunity for someone else to post a correction or a moderator to step in when your feedback falls foul of the rules. PMs are for chit-chat and moral support. No nuts and bolts taper support.

Oh my God. All he did was help me figure out the math about something. 

There was no “taper advice”

I don’t need taper advice. I’ve been doing this for years. I was trying to figure out the math about something.

Leave the guy alone. Uncalled for behavior.

Oh my God. All he did was help me figure out the math about something. 

There was no “taper advice”

I don’t need taper advice. I’ve been doing this for years. I was trying to figure out the math about something.

Leave the guy alone. Uncalled for behavior.

The problem is that we do not attempt to pre-determine what may or may not be obvious and solid advice, and whom is competent enough to impart such advice via the PM system. The rule is absolute because this is the only practical way to frame it. The alternative would be to either: not have the rule; or only enforce the rule for some members. I am sure that you can appreciate that neither of those are good options.

Besides, my response was rather tame - nothing more than a heads-up to builder.

Oh my God. All he did was help me figure out the math about something. 

There was no “taper advice”

There was NOTHING in my response about tapering, or any advice on how to increase, decrease, schedule, modulate, etc, any med.

My advice was a SIMPLE, common procedure to measure out uniform quantities from a non-uniform source.

"... whom is competent enough to impart such advice"

Anyone who can divide and multiply by 10  is "competent" to give that specific advice!

Oh my God. All he did was help me figure out the math about something. 

There was no “taper advice”

 

There was NOTHING in my response about tapering, or any advice on how to increase, decrease, schedule, modulate, etc, any med.

 

My advice was a SIMPLE, common procedure to measure out uniform quantities from a non-uniform source.

 

"... whom is competent enough to impart such advice"

 

Anyone who can divide and multiply by 10  is "competent" to give that specific advice!

And yet, you needed to divide/multiply and impart such advice to another member. You have defeated your own argument. Our member are often cognitively impacted by benzodiazepine use or withdrawal. For these reasons all practical taper/withdrawal help must be posted to the forum boards. Surely this is understandable and common sense given the peculiarities of this support space.

It's math, Colin.  It is constant, non-controversial, absolute, universal. It has nothing to do with tapering or benzos.

1X 10 is always 10, irrespective of the unit or material being measured.  1 lb of flour X 10 is 10 pounds of flour.  2 feet X 10 is 20 feet.  5 ozs of milk  X 10 is 50 ozs of milk...the examples are infinite.

And 1/10 is always .1 (1/10th).  1mg/10 is always .1mg,  1/10 dollar is always .1 dollar, 1/10 volts is always .1volt...again, the examples are limitless.

And if one  really needs to be "competent"  to share this information, rest assured I am fully competent to multiply and divide by 10s, and can even do it without a calculator.

And how is sharing this info I a PM  somehow more"dangerous" than the wealth of misinformation that appears here on the open forums,  endlessly,  each day?

Are they seriously still giving u a hard time?

Leave this guy alone. He helped with math. The end.

This site is filled with harmful opinions, advice, etc every single day.

There’s enough negativity in this hell. Spend ur time directing love and support to others not being passive aggressive and negative towards someone  for doing nothing other than offering help with figuring out a math question. Be better.

Are they seriously still giving u a hard time?

Leave this guy alone. He helped with math. The end.

This site is filled with harmful opinions, advice, etc every single day.

There’s enough negativity in this hell. Spend ur time directing love and support to others not being passive aggressive and negative towards someone  for doing nothing other than offering help with figuring out a math question. Be better.

'Hard time' - really? The only discussion about this matter has occurred in this very thread.

Both of you: those are the rules. They are easy to understand. And I do not recall anyone else ever questioning why we have such a rule given the nature of this forum. The point is, what if the math provided to you was wrong? Rhetorical question - since the rule is not up for discussion.

Colin-

Incorrect info, including calculations, are posted on the open forums multiple times each day.  How is that somehow less "dangerous", or "risky" than something shared in a PM?

The current post under discussion aside, I'm really just trying to get the concept here.

Colin-

 

Incorrect info, including calculations, are posted on the open forums multiple times each day.  How is that somehow less "dangerous", or "risky" than something shared in a PM?

 

The current post under discussion aside, I'm really just trying to get the concept here.

If the information is given in a PM, there is no way for those who are knowledgeable to find the error, correct it and/or offer a different or better solution.

On the open forum the errors can be caught by members. 

This is not a new concept, the rule has been around since the inception of BB.

With all due respect PG (and Colin) there are MAJOR errors shared on the open forums daily than no "knowledgeable" members ever correct.

And if it gets corrected, then who decides what the correct answer is?  You know, does 10/10 really = 1?